Corrected entry: The police chief said that a robot had never committed a crime but a thief could tell a robot to commit a crime for him or he would kill himself, as the robot would have to do it according to the three laws.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.
Correction: That does appear to be a potential loophole, yes, but either it's never actually happened, in which case the chief's statement is correct, or, if it has occured in the past, then it seems quite likely that the police would consider the thief rather than the robot to be the guilty party, as the robot is being coerced into carrying out the crime, in which case his statement is still not unreasonable.
Tailkinker ★